2,000 tons of nitric acid-no problem!

[tonka97]

"SEOUL, South Korea (AP) -- Rescuers in ships and helicopters launched an intensive search Tuesday for 14 sailors feared drowned after their ship disappeared in freezing waters off South Korea.

The South Korean ship was carrying 2,000 tons of nitric acid, but it is unlikely to pose a threat to the ocean or marine life since the chemical dilutes easily, said Choi Eun-ju, a regional Coast Guard officer.".................................................

"The news comes as South Korea battles to contain the nation's worst-ever oil spill, which has blackened beaches and jeopardized the ecosystem along the country's west coast. A wayward barge hit a supertanker on Dec. 7 causing the tanker to leak 78,920 barrels of oil."


The Charleston Gazette - APNews

The ocean appears smaller and more fragile each day, but you wouldn't know it from the media.

 

[ClayJar]

The South Korean ship was carrying 2,000 tons of nitric acid, but it is unlikely to pose a threat to the ocean or marine life since the chemical dilutes easily, said Choi Eun-ju, a regional Coast Guard officer.".................................................

Okay, it's really too early on Christmas morning to do even a back-of-the-envelope calculation, but 2000 tons of "nitric acid" (I'm assuming 16M, i.e. 70% "concentrated nitric acid") is about 11 m³. Once you've diluted that into about a 1 km³, it's effectively irrelevant (since pH increases by 1 for each factor of 10 dilution).

Anyway, taking the first number I've found for "volume of earth's oceans", 1.3 x 10¹⁰⁹, you have about a billion googols as many cubic kilometers of water as you need to dilute this one 11 m³ nitric acid release. It's not to say it's not significant when you have a releases, but this one release is only significant on a very local scale. Without knowing more about the locale in which the release occurred, I can't make a valid estimate of the time it would take for the nitric acid to be diluted to a non-environmentally-threatening level, but it would not be long except if it were in confined waters. Regardless, the effect on the *oceans* of this one spill is immensely less significant than the effect of even one incontinent little kid in an olympic-size swimming pool. :biggrin:

Oil spills are much more significant, as they do not dilute in water. In a quiescent body of water, they would spread out across the surface (on the order of length squared) instead of through the volume (on the order of length cubed), but all to often spills happen near shores and do not provide time or space for dilution to mitigate the damage. Additionally, the physical properties of oil (being a non-water-soluble liquid) significantly increase the damage.

 

[tonka97]

Thank you ClayJar.

Okay, it's really too early on Christmas morning to do even a back-of-the-envelope calculation, but 2000 tons of "nitric acid" (I'm assuming 16M, i.e. 70% "concentrated nitric acid") is about 11 m³. Once you've diluted that into about a 1 km³, it's effectively irrelevant (since pH increases by 1 for each factor of 10 dilution).

Anyway, taking the first number I've found for "volume of earth's oceans", 1.3 x 10¹⁰⁹, you have about a billion googols as many cubic kilometers of water as you need to dilute this one 11 m³ nitric acid release. It's not to say it's not significant when you have a releases, but this one release is only significant on a very local scale. Without knowing more about the locale in which the release occurred, I can't make a valid estimate of the time it would take for the nitric acid to be diluted to a non-environmentally-threatening level, but it would not be long except if it were in confined waters. Regardless, the effect on the *oceans* of this one spill is immensely less significant than the effect of even one incontinent little kid in an olympic-size swimming pool. :biggrin:

Oil spills are much more significant, as they do not dilute in water. In a quiescent body of water, they would spread out across the surface (on the order of length squared) instead of through the volume (on the order of length cubed), but all to often spills happen near shores and do not provide time or space for dilution to mitigate the damage. Additionally, the physical properties of oil (being a non-water-soluble liquid) significantly increase the damage.

 

[Kim]

The oil spill they had recently that was also mentioned was MUCH more significant. It's been a complete disaster on their west coast - on the scale of the Exxon Valdez. Apart from the environmental damage that it's obviously caused, it's also wiped out the entire fishing and shellfish industry on that side of the penisular. Considering that that industry was basically all there was there to start with, they have some real problems now.

 

[Blind]

Considering the sea is one big buffer due to all the ions in it, the nitric acid would only do limited damage to the first area it reacts with before it is diluted and buffered by all the salt in the sea water. Its not an ecotoxin. I used to work with very large volumes of various acids, i kinda miss the job at times. The loss of life is the real tradigity here.